What is the main issue? That’s how trimming in most helicopters work, if they even have it. And yeah, all helicopters need forward cyclic to fly forward.
An Airbus H-125 is not supposed to require full forward cyclic (and the real H-125 does not have trim functionality, and even if it did, you would still have full forward cyclic). See a few posts further up, an experienced H-125 pilot says the same regarding full forward cyclic.
1 Like
That is not how trim in any helicopter works, but it is how trim in simulated helicopters work.
1 Like
That’s what I meant. Even the trim for the old FSX Dodosim 206 works like that. That’s the best way to overcome the limitation of springloaded sticks which are the standard in simming hardware. Sure, we can call that a “workaround”, but I think the amount of simmers that have a special cyclic stick that stays in place like a force trim is less than 1%.
Regardless of whether we’re using a simulated trim or not the basic issue here is that the cyclic needs to held much further forward in the cruise than on most other default helicopters. Good to see that this behaviour doesn’t reflect the real world H125. It would be great to see this fixed.
I have quick trim assigned on all my helicopter control profiles but this is the only default helicopter where I find it necessary to use the trim. I’m using a Velocity One FlightStick and pedals.
4 Likes
Exactly! 
2 Likes
This is not only a deviation from reality in terms of, let’s call it a „stat“, as in, as you say, “the NR just takes too long to decay on shutdown“, though.
The autorotation behavior speaks volumes about a completely false rotor inertia being simulated. Even with a failed engine you can land it smoothly with RPM to spare, nearly no need for RL autorotation proceedures 
I made a post about this. But the more I spend time with this and other wrong behaviors of the H125 or rather helis in MSFS 2024 in general the more I think they made a significant wrong step from 2020 to 2024 in terms of basic native rotor craft modeling that devs have to interface with when making a particular helicopter.
4 Likes
This video also shows that there is a lot of work to be done on the sound of the h125 because currently it has nothing to do with reality
This answer underlines IMHO the divergence between what I suspect MS/Asobos view is and what -at least I am- looking for in a simulator:
The one side seems to go for a kind of make-believe simulation like -a bit unfairly simplifying but for clarity sake- the flight model in a GTA game. “A helicopter needs to lean forward to go faster? Then full deflection forward and max. power must equal max. speed.” The game “Apache Air Assault” worked like that for example. And like you say: 99% have self centering cheap sticks anyway, so this is further justification for simplicity. MS/Asobo seem to want to go the middle route, make-believe flight model with realistic aspects. I suspect to make the program more entertaining for non-simmers and to safe money, because they want every kind of aircraft in there.
The other side would be to make a model that is reflecting reality as close as possible and implement aids that help those with limited control surface suitability and beginners.
For example the Dreamfoil Bell 407 had a software trim (like for a hat switch as discussed) and a “force hold” button scheme where one could freeze the current cyclic setting and with the button still pushed return the stick to center.
Both are aids not found in reality. But in both cases the flight model went on with the calculation as if the stick was deflected. Meaning the “virtual stick” was still deflected. In in my understanding that is what was the topic here.
Yet, in a sense of the pursuit of “the best flight modeling” it is simply not enough to say “it can be trimmed to go to 130kts” if this implies that the stick deflection -value- in the calculation is full forward. This should not be the case at all, since it is not needed in real life on the original.
And why I write this in detail: the consequences don’t stop at the individual cases that users have issues with. A full forward cyclic needed to get to cruise is a symptom of wrong simulation of cruise flight period. Flaring the helicopter with no or low collective at speed not shallowing the descent rate enough hints toward problems with the aerodynamic simulation. Rotor speed taking very long to decay for shutdown hints toward too high inertia assumptions or a complete lack of simulated aspects in this regard (inertia, friction, blade angles). Hovering behavior IGE depending on only one surface point below causes problems when landing on small platforms and in the field with complex geometry below.
It is no use to argue back and forth about opinions. There are certain aspects that can be measured and compared and frankly MSFS does not a good job simulating rotor crafts in some aspects.
After much consideration I think it is important to state this and not to accept the fact that the flight models behave well enough inside their standard envelope.
Why? Because if every dev would have viewed it like this, the convergence of simulations to RL behavior would have become stagnant in the past and we wouldn’t have what we have today. MSFS probably still would go with procedural calculations, no CFD modeling and we wouldn’t have progress. And progress was made since the 2000s, definitely. And MSFS 2024 IMHO in some aspects is a step backwards.
3 Likes
To be fair, I didn’t remember that the Asobo H125 needed full forward to keep going. I use the Cowansim H125 instead, which behaves better. You are right, of course.
Spot on. Some of these behaviors I was lenient on in 2020 because it was their first go and I wanted to give the benefit of the doubt that they would improve and correct them. Now It’s starting to become clear that the priority is not to develop the helicopter FM to achieve realism, but rather general usability for the larger user base.
The most egregious behavior is the rotor dynamics during autorotation. You cannot manipulate the RRPM like you can in a real helicopter with both the collective and cyclic(disk angle). Once you lose RRPM, it’s nearly impossible to get it back, but it doesn’t matter anyway, because the helicopter keeps flying even when the blades of a real one would fold up like a tulip.
edit: just for everyone’s info…The blades on a helicopter are designed to work at a specific RRPM. Below the number on the green arc of the gauge(give or take safety factor), they will not support the weight of the helicopter because they require the calculated centrifugal force to maintain rigidity. That is why RRPMs below the arc are unrecoverable.
1 Like
Im not a real life rotary pilot, but i have a few thousand hours in sims, and the H125 is the only helicopter that i know of that i have had to use trim to fly it comfortably. Sure i use trim in all different helicopters, but mostly during cruise from A to B, but in the Asobo H125, trim is almost needed from the getgo.
Besides, holding the cyclic almost 100% forward just to keep to cruise speed is just insanity, not only for the pilot, but for the helicopters hydraulics, as you’d have zero margin of error if something were to happen!
1 Like
Just for reference for any who doubt the necessary stick deflection, here is a screenshot of a ~140kts cruise with the input viewer in the lower right corner.
It’s about 75% which is neither realistic nor a pleasure to fly with a spring loaded stick.
Besides, the 85%-90% collective is also anything but true to life afaik and so is the needed rudder to keep it straight…
2 Likes
I hope some native MSFS 2024 3rd party helicopters will become available soon. They should allow for a more refined flight model. I see the Schweitzer has been updated to 24-native. Has anyone tried it yet?
We’ve been discussing here
It flies pretty much the same as it did in MSFS. The pedal inputs are correct in what’s needed, but a bit light in travel, if that makes sense.
Most users won’t like it, but it flies like a real Schweizer would.
1 Like
The h-125 helicopter Asobo , has a particularly incorrect fuel consumption, it takes one and a half tanks of fuel for one hour of flight
This is a pretty good example why I dont like flying helicopters in FS24.
Quite understandable from my point of view.
It also raises the question why to bother. Why not just shut up and use Xplane and/or DCS instead?
And the answer is that despite all MSFS 2020 and 2024 offer -the- best visuals in terms of representation of our world. I personally care much less if all joints and bolts are included in an aircraft model and how high the texture resolution is than what the world outside looks like. Because this is what completes the immersion. And this is even more important for helicopters, since they operate mostly close to the ground (relatively speaking).
So it is really sad to have these visuals and have the namesake part, “Flight Simulator”, not honored!
But the platform is there, so why not improve it?
1 Like